De-Extinction and the Rights of Extinct Animals—A Moral and Legal Perspective

The concept of de-extinction proposes the revival of extinct species, raising numerous ethical and legal questions. The famous movie Jurassic Park sparked these debates by imagining the resurrection of dinosaurs, leading to scenarios such as extinct animals engaging in combat. While the idea of de-extinction brings back species deemed extinct, it also raises critical questions about the rights of these animals and whether they can be cruelly used in such contexts.

Legal Perspectives on De-Extinction

Legally speaking, animals, whether extinct or not, are generally not afforded the same rights as humans or even protected by the same laws. For instance, while laws in many jurisdictions protect animals from cruelty, there is no specific legal framework addressing extinct animals. It is indeed highly unlikely that there is any existing legislation specifically prohibiting cruelty to extinct animals, as the concept of concurrence with current animal protection laws might be absent.

Most laws regulating animal welfare center around the treatment of living animals. The legal distinctions between extinct and re-introduced species are often unclear, leading to potential loopholes. In many regions, the focus of animal rights legislation is on preventing harm and protection of living creatures, rather than on de-extinction per se. Therefore, even if a private company were to bring back extinct species like dinosaurs, it is debatable whether such actions are specifically prohibited by current laws.

Moral Considerations of De-Extinction

From a moral standpoint, the concerns surrounding de-extinction go beyond legal boundaries. Bringing back extinct animals can indeed lead to moral dilemmas, especially when it involves the infliction of suffering on these creatures. The revival of an extinct species implies a new existence and a potential new set of rights and protections. As these animals are biochemically capable of feeling pain and suffering, the moral implications of using them for purposes such as combat are profound.

The idea of resurrecting an extinct species and then subjecting them to cruel practices is ethically contentious. These animals are, by all means, living entities capable of experiencing pain and distress, even if they were extinct before their resurrection. The moral burden of ensuring their well-being should be a priority, rather than exploiting them for entertainment or power.

Conclusion and Recommendations

De-extinction is a fascinating concept with both potential scientific and ethical dimensions. However, the current legal and moral landscapes do not adequately address the emerging challenges brought about by de-extinction. As we develop the technology to bring extinct species back, it is imperative to establish a new discourse that considers the welfare and rights of these beings.

The revival of extinct animals should be approached with caution, prioritizing ethical considerations over commercial interests. Legal frameworks need to be developed to address the unique status of these creatures. This includes not only protections against abuse but also the establishment of a new category of legal rights for extinct and re-introduced species.

Ultimately, any de-extinction process must be guided by a balanced approach that respects the rights and well-being of these living entities. Protecting the rights of extinct animals is not only an ethical necessity but a responsible approach to managing the outcomes of scientific advancements.